Health Policy: The Need for Governance

Lawrence Mead

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Health policy must accept public control of the health care system, and the resulting political dilemmas, if the health cost crisis is to be resolved. Public governance is one way of achieving order and rationality in health—that is, controlling the health sector and allocating social resources to it optimally. These goals are not achieved now, because of a system of insured, fee-for-service financing, in which actors need not balance the overall benefits of care against their cost. In theory, control could be achieved by either delegating care and spending decisions to health professionals or by mar ket allocation. But for fundamental as well as practical reasons, neither of these mechanisms has restrained costs adequately. Hence, explicit public control seems inevitable. Federal health policy has moved toward it. Success will depend on resolving the resulting political tensions. Governance re quires continual wrestling with provider and patient inter ests in which there can be no clear standards for the correct course of action. Public control should be structured to facilitate resolution of these tensions. Public utility approaches tend to accord the providers too much autonomy; radical political reforms, too little. European experience suggests that a combination of central budget control with decentralized administration may be the best way to achieve order and rationality in health.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)39-57
    Number of pages19
    JournalThe ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
    Volume434
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - 1977

    Fingerprint

    health policy
    governance
    rationality
    costs
    health
    public utilities
    control theory
    political reform
    fee
    health professionals
    budget
    autonomy
    health care
    resources
    experience

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Sociology and Political Science
    • Social Sciences(all)

    Cite this

    Health Policy : The Need for Governance. / Mead, Lawrence.

    In: The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 434, No. 1, 1977, p. 39-57.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{a2db877dbdfd4ab3a2ef74ab765dbea0,
    title = "Health Policy: The Need for Governance",
    abstract = "Health policy must accept public control of the health care system, and the resulting political dilemmas, if the health cost crisis is to be resolved. Public governance is one way of achieving order and rationality in health—that is, controlling the health sector and allocating social resources to it optimally. These goals are not achieved now, because of a system of insured, fee-for-service financing, in which actors need not balance the overall benefits of care against their cost. In theory, control could be achieved by either delegating care and spending decisions to health professionals or by mar ket allocation. But for fundamental as well as practical reasons, neither of these mechanisms has restrained costs adequately. Hence, explicit public control seems inevitable. Federal health policy has moved toward it. Success will depend on resolving the resulting political tensions. Governance re quires continual wrestling with provider and patient inter ests in which there can be no clear standards for the correct course of action. Public control should be structured to facilitate resolution of these tensions. Public utility approaches tend to accord the providers too much autonomy; radical political reforms, too little. European experience suggests that a combination of central budget control with decentralized administration may be the best way to achieve order and rationality in health.",
    author = "Lawrence Mead",
    year = "1977",
    doi = "10.1177/000271627743400104",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "434",
    pages = "39--57",
    journal = "Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science",
    issn = "0002-7162",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
    number = "1",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Health Policy

    T2 - The Need for Governance

    AU - Mead, Lawrence

    PY - 1977

    Y1 - 1977

    N2 - Health policy must accept public control of the health care system, and the resulting political dilemmas, if the health cost crisis is to be resolved. Public governance is one way of achieving order and rationality in health—that is, controlling the health sector and allocating social resources to it optimally. These goals are not achieved now, because of a system of insured, fee-for-service financing, in which actors need not balance the overall benefits of care against their cost. In theory, control could be achieved by either delegating care and spending decisions to health professionals or by mar ket allocation. But for fundamental as well as practical reasons, neither of these mechanisms has restrained costs adequately. Hence, explicit public control seems inevitable. Federal health policy has moved toward it. Success will depend on resolving the resulting political tensions. Governance re quires continual wrestling with provider and patient inter ests in which there can be no clear standards for the correct course of action. Public control should be structured to facilitate resolution of these tensions. Public utility approaches tend to accord the providers too much autonomy; radical political reforms, too little. European experience suggests that a combination of central budget control with decentralized administration may be the best way to achieve order and rationality in health.

    AB - Health policy must accept public control of the health care system, and the resulting political dilemmas, if the health cost crisis is to be resolved. Public governance is one way of achieving order and rationality in health—that is, controlling the health sector and allocating social resources to it optimally. These goals are not achieved now, because of a system of insured, fee-for-service financing, in which actors need not balance the overall benefits of care against their cost. In theory, control could be achieved by either delegating care and spending decisions to health professionals or by mar ket allocation. But for fundamental as well as practical reasons, neither of these mechanisms has restrained costs adequately. Hence, explicit public control seems inevitable. Federal health policy has moved toward it. Success will depend on resolving the resulting political tensions. Governance re quires continual wrestling with provider and patient inter ests in which there can be no clear standards for the correct course of action. Public control should be structured to facilitate resolution of these tensions. Public utility approaches tend to accord the providers too much autonomy; radical political reforms, too little. European experience suggests that a combination of central budget control with decentralized administration may be the best way to achieve order and rationality in health.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84970305484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84970305484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1177/000271627743400104

    DO - 10.1177/000271627743400104

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:84970305484

    VL - 434

    SP - 39

    EP - 57

    JO - Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

    JF - Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

    SN - 0002-7162

    IS - 1

    ER -